[Info-vax] Apache + mod_php performance

[Michael S]

On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 00:35:36 -0400
Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:

> On 10/6/2024 11:12 AM, Michael S wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 17:43:02 -0000 (UTC)
> > cross at spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote:
> >  
> >> In article <vdp8kn$a67s$1 at dont-email.me>,
> >> Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:  
> >>> On 10/3/2024 7:00 PM, Chris Townley wrote:  
> >>>> [snip]
> >>>> I don't remember George, but we have certainly woken up Dave! ;)
> >>>>
> >>>> and I am sure the troll is happy...  
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure whether I've been insulted?  
> >>
> >> I suspect the "troll" reference is to Lawrence.  Sadly, Arne can
> >> not help himself when it comes to resisting arguing with that
> >> clown.
> >>
> >> 	- Dan C.
> >>  
> >
> > Troll or not, but the question about ability to pass open TCP
> > socket to child process (or, may be, to unrelated process) under
> > VMS is a good question.
> > As a lurker, I am waiting for the expert answer with interest.
> >  
> 
> Well, some of the issue is in the text of the question.  What does
> one mean be "pass socket"?
> 
> When creating a socket, one can specify it to be shared.  What I was
> doing was passing the information to a worker process, then letting
> the worker process open the existing socket.
> 
> So, would that be considered "passing an open socket"?
> 

Yes, it would be.

On Windows one has to go through similar 3-stage procedure:
 - [in parent process] acquire magic record from the open socket by
   means of WSADuplicateSocket() 
 - pass the record to child by any of available IPC mechanisms
 - [in child process] use magic record to re-open socket with
WSASocket()

I never had a need of for it in practice. Looking at docs it seems
that the procedure above has at least one inconvenient aspect - the
target process has to exist at the moment of WSADuplicateSocket() call.
Still, I suppose that it's better than nothing.

> I can post some of the development code is anyone is interested.  I
> was working on the inter-process communications when I dropped the
> project.  I believe I did open the shared socket in the worker
> process.
> 

May be, others are interested in the code. 
For me, I'd rather read textual description of the procedure and war
story of making it work.